Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Kind of, but mostly it's related to when delta took over as the main variant in a country. People seemed to have got good at handling alpha, but delta has really stung.
No sign of Italy, they must be doing something right. Whats happened to Cyprus?Kind of, but mostly it's related to when delta took over as the main variant in a country. People seemed to have got good at handling alpha, but delta has really stung.
Russian tourists most likely.
Italy is only just starting to see delta case rise, the upturn wouldn't really show you anything much on that graph scale yet. The frightening thing is when you look at how low the UK was and how little time it took to get where it is now. Those minor looking case rises can grow fast in the right local conditions.
The UK (sorry, Ingerland) has an irreversible opening though
Thats the worry with all these huge gatherings but I suppose it would happen in a fortnight anyway .
I have very close friends in Cyprus and have spoken to them regularly but a lot are refusing to get the vaccination.
The chart is interesting but does not tell the full story. We can rank coutries only if these countries are undertaking the same number of tests per million people!Kind of, but mostly it's related to when delta took over as the main variant in a country. People seemed to have got good at handling alpha, but delta has really stung.
More cases per million people because more tests per million people!
Very bizarre indeed to say the least. Still something unbelievable to me.
Yes this is correct. Everyone over the age of 16 has been offered the vaccine since mid June. Plus they have a choice between Pfizer, Moderna, AZ or JJ when making an appointment. The problem is that the under 30 age bracket only has a 30% uptake so far (village mentality, relying on FB for info etc), so the Delta variant is blitzing them at the moment.
Exactly, anyone that has refused a vaccine needs to do a compulsory rapid or PCR test once a week in order to work or visit a restaurant or bar.. hence the high number of tests and high number of cases as a result. The positivity rate is only 2% at the moment, so 50k tests daily means 1k positives at the moment.
You can only test people if they ask for it. Many countries are using positivity rate as a key indicator for that reason.
That’s how it has always been when we are in the early stages of a sharp increase in transmission. Deaths lag cases so don’t pay attention to the low death numbers, watch the case trajectory until it peaks, and then assess the damage that follows. That’s been the general measurement protocol and it’s the best way to mitigate against our general tendency to intuitively misunderstand exponential growth.
In the UK now, the attention of most people in government and the media is on hospitalisations. The non-hospital related impacts have mostly been pushed out of the discussion. That includes GP services who are struggling with the routine treatment demands of even the mild cases, at risk people (who can't be vaxxed, or who don't respond to the vaccine) and the fear that the post-viral conditions (long covid etc) are going to overwhelm respiratory rehab centres etc for months or even years.
You have to be joking. For the first time since the pandemic started almost every single expert is agreed on this one. Zero covid is off the table. There are some fringe elements still digging their heels but literally nobody who understand what’s going on thinks zero covid is an option any more.
The UK’s current policy isn’t even “zero covid”, it’s fairly well balanced. The UK’s policy from July 19th is pretty much the polar opposite of “zero covid”.
Pretty much. Although there are reasons to be a alarmed given some of the decisions - making masks non-compulsory, and the inevitable impact that this will have on the more vulnerable once again. Sadly though, that's something that will happen in any instance of coming out of lockdown. We've lived in an alien way for the best part of 18 months, in part, to protect the most vulnerable, and now we're trying to mark a way out of this.
At the moment we don't know where the hospitalisations are going to end up, that's the gamble.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What do you mean by this? As per the graph shared above by @jojojo, the virus is particularly prevalent in the UK vs. neighbouring countries.
You’re correct. The idea that new variants will spring up somewhere in the world anyway, so who cares if it happens in the UK is ridiculous. It’s obviously important to do everything possible to avoid being ground zero with these new variants. Look what delta did to India while they were still getting to grips with it ffs.What do you mean by this? As per the graph shared above by @jojojo, the virus is particularly prevalent in the UK vs. neighbouring countries.
Here it is set in a wider context. Looking at the growth curve, mutation fears are particularly acute in the UK...unless I'm misunderstanding? The high levels of vaccination - and in particular, high levels of partial protection from 1 dose - creates additional selection pressures which create additional risks for the worst kind of mutations too.
Caveat: bear in mind the difference in testing strategies has some impact on the number of tests, although supply tends to go up in line with demand so big picture analysis is still possible
Given the UK's testing rate compared to elsewhere, I'd think there are places (Brazil, parts of Asia, even Cyprus potentially) which are just as likely to produce new variants as the UK. I think these global comparisons are relatively flawed. The access to accurate data is far too inconsistent. Just look at the numbers (cases/deaths/etc) being reported by India during it's peak, it was clearly nowhere close to the realities being faced.What do you mean by this? As per the graph shared above by @jojojo, the virus is particularly prevalent in the UK vs. neighbouring countries.
Here it is set in a wider context. Looking at the growth curve, mutation fears are particularly acute in the UK...unless I'm misunderstanding? The high levels of vaccination - and in particular, high levels of partial protection from 1 dose - creates additional selection pressures which create additional risks for the worst kind of mutations too.
Caveat: bear in mind the difference in testing strategies has some impact on the number of tests, although supply tends to go up in line with demand so big picture analysis is still possible
But if they're just as likely to produce new variants - which, as you say, is a legitimate possibility - then why is that a reason to fear less about the UK? Or why isn't that level of likelihood not enough to worry about? I understand the concerns about the variations in data collection, but if you are just going to discount the best data we have available for International comparisons, then you're basically ruling out knowing whether the UK is any worse or better. Which is fair enough but isn't a good reason to downplay concerns, surely? To balance out the differences in testing practices you can look at positivity rate. On that front the UK is certainly worse than many, many countries right now, particularly given the fact the positivity rate has increased from around 0.2% back in May to 2.4% this week, and has been increasing almost daily for the last fortnight.
I don't think we should fear less about new variants from the UK than elsewhere, but there are inevitably going to be new variants nevertheless which will find entry points to places irregardless of whatever lockdown measures a country takes. I think what we're seeing more and more of as Covid continues/develops/becomes something we have to live with, is that lockdowns are short-term solutions/means of preventing health systems being overrun. The mood now seems to be that if the risk of the latter isn't evidenced, then opening up is the way forward (this is probably what politicians mean by "living with the virus").
I am generally on the same page about healthcare system overload being the primary health factor being considered, and government decisions can be justified on that basis if their assumptions about spread and hospitalisation rate hold true. So far they’re tracking well enough but there’s evidence to suggest we might depart from expected levels, and so they are clearly taking a risk. I understand why when balanced up against other risks but it needs to be acknowledged that it is a risk, and concerns about cases is not hysteria.
I agree with you on virtually all fronts here. The UK is taking a huge risk, and sort of assuming that herd immunity with the presence of the vaccine becomes a justifiable approach. That's certainly what it seems like from the offset.
Everyone with a “bad cold” right now has covid (specifically the delta variant) unless proven otherwise. I wouldn’t let anyone in my house with a bad cold (especially an unvaccinated child) unless they’ve had a negative test (LFT at the very least, ideally PCR) The time when you might unduly freak someone out is unfortunately long gone.
I've got a 2 year old, its not nice doing regular LFTs but we do. And recently after going back to nursery she'd picked up all sorts of nasty bugs. Walk in centre means we usually get a PCR sorted within the hour and results usually within a day. She's had 3 PCRs in the last 2 months.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Asking about Covid would be my first question
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
